ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 5(4), MUMBAI V. MR ABHAY N. MANUDHANE RESOLUTION PROFESSIONAL OF M/S HOUSING DEVELOPMENT & INFRASTRUTURE LTD, MUMBAI

MA 125/MUM/2023

AI Insights

The case involves the Revenue seeking recall/rectification of the Tribunal's earlier order which deemed their appeals non-maintainable due to procedural lapses in amending Form No. 36. The appeals pertained to the assessment years 2013-14 and 2016-17 against Mr. Abhay N. Manudhane, the Resolution Professional of M/s Housing Development & Infrastructure Ltd. The Tribunal initially found the appeals non-maintainable as the necessary amendments to include the Resolution Professional's name were not made. However, upon the Revenue filing a revised Form No. 36 and citing precedents that appellate proceedings can continue during a moratorium under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, the Tribunal admitted the applications for adjudication.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 773494 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 7 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 22-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 02-02-2023
• Other Referred Cases: Sundaresh Bhatt, Liquidator of ABG Shipyard v. CBIC, Doshion Veolia Water Solution Pvt. Ltd. v. V.M. Deshpande Rajendra Prasad Tak
• Laws Referred To: Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: HIMANSHU JOSHI
• Assessee Lawyers: RAMESH JAIN VIRTUALLY PRESENT
• Keywords: Reassessment proceedings; Period of limitation; Time period of passing order; Recovery proceedings; Liquidation

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) MA No. 125 & 126/MUM/2023 (Arising out of 5921/MUM/2017 & ITA No. 7280/Mum/2019) Assessment Year: 2013-14 & 2016-17 Asst. CIT Central Circle-5(4), Room No. 1927, 19th floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Vs. Mr. Abhay N. Manudhane Resolution Professional of M/s Housing Development & Infrastructure Ltd. PAN NO. AAACH 5443 F Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Ramesh Jain (Virtually Present) Revenue by : Mr. Himanshu Joshi, Sr. Dr Date of Hearing : 27/06/2025 Date of pronouncement : 22/09/2025 ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM By way of the Miscellaneous Applications, the Revenue is seeking recall/rectification of the order of the Tribunal passed in ITA No. 5921/Mum/2017 and ITA No. 7820/Mum/2019 for assessment years 2013-14 and 2016-17. These appeals were held by the Tribunal as non-maintainable as Form No. 36 prescribed for filing appeal before ITAT was not amended by the Revenue despite repeated opportunity to incorporate the name of resolution Printed from counselvise.com professional who was controlling the affairs of the assessee company during relevant period. 2. At the very outset, it deserves to be noted that the Registry had pointed out a delay of one day in filing the Miscellaneous Application. However, upon verification of the record, we find that the order of the Tribunal was received in the office of th Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) on 23.11.2022, whereas the present Miscellaneous Application was filed on 02.02.2023. Thus, the filing is within the statutory period of six months reckoned from the end of the month in which the order of the T received by the Revenue. In that view of the matter, the Miscellaneous Application admitted for adjudication. 3. During the course of hearing, the learned Departmental Representative submitted that the Revenue has filed a revised Form No. 36 bringing the learned Corporate Resolution Professional (CRP) on record. Reliance was placed on the decision of the Co ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 78/Mum/2018, A.Y. 2012 the dictum of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Liquidator of ABG Shipyard v. CBIC judgment dated 26.08.2022), it was held that appellate proceedings before the ITAT can continue even during the moratorium imposed MA No. Mr. Abhay N. Manudhane Resolution Professional of M/s Housing Development & professional who was controlling the affairs of the assessee company during relevant period. At the very outset, it deserves to be noted that the Registry had pointed out a delay of one day in filing the Miscellaneous Application. However, upon verification of the record, we find that the order of the Tribunal was received in the office of th Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) on 23.11.2022, whereas the present Miscellaneous Application was filed on 02.02.2023. Thus, the filing is within the statutory period of six months reckoned from the end of the month in which the order of the T received by the Revenue. In that view of the matter, the Miscellaneous Applications are held to be within limitation and admitted for adjudication. During the course of hearing, the learned Departmental Representative submitted that the Revenue has filed a revised Form the learned Corporate Resolution Professional . Reliance was placed on the decision of the Co Bench of this Tribunal in Doshion Veolia Water Solution (ITA No. 78/Mum/2018, A.Y. 2012–13), wherein, following the dictum of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sundaresh Bhatt, Liquidator of ABG Shipyard v. CBIC (Civil Appeal No. 7667 of 2021, nt dated 26.08.2022), it was held that appellate proceedings before the ITAT can continue even during the moratorium imposed MA No. 125 & 126/MUM/2023 2 Mr. Abhay N. Manudhane Resolution Professional of M/s Housing Development & Infrastructure Ltd professional who was controlling the affairs of the assessee At the very outset, it deserves to be noted that the Registry had pointed out a delay of one day in filing the Miscellaneous Application. However, upon verification of the record, we find that the order of the Tribunal was received in the office of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) on 23.11.2022, whereas the present Miscellaneous Application was filed on 02.02.2023. Thus, the filing is within the statutory period of six months reckoned from the end of the month in which the order of the Tribunal was received by the Revenue. In that view of the matter, the held to be within limitation and During the course of hearing, the learned Departmental Representative submitted that the Revenue has filed a revised Form the learned Corporate Resolution Professional . Reliance was placed on the decision of the Co- Doshion Veolia Water Solution 13), wherein, following Sundaresh Bhatt, (Civil Appeal No. 7667 of 2021, nt dated 26.08.2022), it was held that appellate proceedings before the ITAT can continue even during the moratorium imposed Printed from counselvise.com under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”). The embargo, it was observed, applies only to recovery of tax dues. It was accordingly urged that the instant appeals be recalled and heard on merits. 3.1 Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the Resolution Professional submitted that in view of section 14 of the IBC, institution or continuation of proceedings is barred moratorium period and therefore, the Revenue’s prayer is untenable. 4. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the record. The legal position stands settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sundaresh Bhatt Revenue may proceed to assess or determine the tax liability of the corporate debtor, no recovery of such dues can be effected during the subsistence of moratorium under sections 14 or 33(5) of the IBC. The Hon’ble Apex Court has Revenue, like that of any other creditor, is required to be lodged before the Resolution Professional or Liquidator, as the case may be, to be dealt with in accordance with the mechanism prescribed under section 53 of the IB 4.1 The Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in Water Solution Pvt. Ltd. MA No. Mr. Abhay N. Manudhane Resolution Professional of M/s Housing Development & under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”). The embargo, it was observed, applies only to recovery of tax dues. It accordingly urged that the instant appeals be recalled and 3.1 Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the Resolution Professional submitted that in view of section 14 of the IBC, institution or continuation of proceedings is barred moratorium period and therefore, the Revenue’s prayer is We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the record. The legal position stands settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Sundaresh Bhatt (supra), wherein it is held that while the Revenue may proceed to assess or determine the tax liability of the corporate debtor, no recovery of such dues can be effected during the subsistence of moratorium under sections 14 or 33(5) of the Apex Court has clarified that the claim of the Revenue, like that of any other creditor, is required to be lodged before the Resolution Professional or Liquidator, as the case may be, to be dealt with in accordance with the mechanism prescribed under section 53 of the IBC. ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in Water Solution Pvt. Ltd. (supra), after an exhaustive analysis of the MA No. 125 & 126/MUM/2023 3 Mr. Abhay N. Manudhane Resolution Professional of M/s Housing Development & Infrastructure Ltd under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”). The embargo, it was observed, applies only to recovery of tax dues. It accordingly urged that the instant appeals be recalled and 3.1 Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the Resolution Professional submitted that in view of section 14 of the IBC, institution or continuation of proceedings is barred during the moratorium period and therefore, the Revenue’s prayer is We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the record. The legal position stands settled by the Hon’ble Supreme held that while the Revenue may proceed to assess or determine the tax liability of the corporate debtor, no recovery of such dues can be effected during the subsistence of moratorium under sections 14 or 33(5) of the clarified that the claim of the Revenue, like that of any other creditor, is required to be lodged before the Resolution Professional or Liquidator, as the case may be, to be dealt with in accordance with the mechanism prescribed ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in Doshion Veolia (supra), after an exhaustive analysis of the Printed from counselvise.com statutory scheme and judicial precedents including v. V.M. Deshpande Rajendra Prasad Tak judgment dated 30.10.2023), has categorically held that appellate proceedings before the ITAT amount only to determination of tax liability and do not fall within the mischief of the moratorium u section 14 of the IBC. The embargo is restricted to recovery proceedings. The relevant finding of the Tribunal is reproduced as under: “13. It appears that since no resolution plan was approved by the committee of creditors of corporate debt insolvency resolution process. On the direction of the committee of creditors, the Resolution Professional initiating liquidation process of corporate debtor, which was allowed by adjudicating authority as a the judgment dated 26.08.2022 passed by another three judges bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ci Sundaresh Bhatt, Liquidator of ABC Shipyard V. Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, wh paras 43,44,45 & 54, has held as under \"43, In the above context, the judgment of this Court in S.V. Kondaskar v. V.M. Deshpande, AIR 1972 SC 878, is extremely relevant. In that case, this Court, while expounding the interplay of Section 446 of the Companies Act 1956 (bankruptcy provision) with the Income Tax Act, 1961, held as follows: \"7 Looking at the legislative history and the sche of the Indian Companies Act, particularly the language of Section 446, read as a whole, to us that the expression \"other legal proceeding\" in sub-section (1) and the expression \"legal proceeding\" in sub-section (2) convey the same sense and the MA No. Mr. Abhay N. Manudhane Resolution Professional of M/s Housing Development & statutory scheme and judicial precedents including [AIR 1972 SC 878] and PCIT (Customs) Rajendra Prasad Tak (Civil Appeal Nos. 6432– judgment dated 30.10.2023), has categorically held that appellate proceedings before the ITAT amount only to determination of tax liability and do not fall within the mischief of the moratorium u section 14 of the IBC. The embargo is restricted to recovery The relevant finding of the Tribunal is reproduced as 13. It appears that since no resolution plan was approved by the e of creditors of corporate debtor within the corporate insolvency resolution process. On the direction of the committee of Resolution Professional moved an application for initiating liquidation process of corporate debtor, which was allowed by adjudicating authority as above. We take further guidance from the judgment dated 26.08.2022 passed by another three judges bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 7667 of 2021, Sundaresh Bhatt, Liquidator of ABC Shipyard V. Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, wherein Hon’ble Apex Court, vide paras 43,44,45 & 54, has held as under”: \"43, In the above context, the judgment of this Court in S.V. Kondaskar v. V.M. Deshpande, AIR 1972 SC 878, is extremely relevant. In that case, this Court, while expounding lay of Section 446 of the Companies Act 1956 (bankruptcy provision) with the Income Tax Act, 1961, held \"7 Looking at the legislative history and the sche of the Indian Companies Act, particularly the language of Section 446, read as a whole, it appears to us that the expression \"other legal proceeding\" in section (1) and the expression \"legal proceeding\" section (2) convey the same sense and the MA No. 125 & 126/MUM/2023 4 Mr. Abhay N. Manudhane Resolution Professional of M/s Housing Development & Infrastructure Ltd statutory scheme and judicial precedents including S.V. Kondaskar PCIT (Customs) v. 6433 of 2023, judgment dated 30.10.2023), has categorically held that appellate proceedings before the ITAT amount only to determination of tax liability and do not fall within the mischief of the moratorium under section 14 of the IBC. The embargo is restricted to recovery The relevant finding of the Tribunal is reproduced as 13. It appears that since no resolution plan was approved by the or within the corporate insolvency resolution process. On the direction of the committee of moved an application for initiating liquidation process of corporate debtor, which was allowed bove. We take further guidance from the judgment dated 26.08.2022 passed by another three judges al No. 7667 of 2021, Sundaresh Bhatt, Liquidator of ABC Shipyard V. Central Board of ble Apex Court, vide \"43, In the above context, the judgment of this Court in S.V. Kondaskar v. V.M. Deshpande, AIR 1972 SC 878, is extremely relevant. In that case, this Court, while expounding lay of Section 446 of the Companies Act 1956 (bankruptcy provision) with the Income Tax Act, 1961, held \"7 Looking at the legislative history and the scheme of the Indian Companies Act, particularly the it appears to us that the expression \"other legal proceeding\" in section (1) and the expression \"legal proceeding\" section (2) convey the same sense and the Printed from counselvise.com proceedings in both the sub as can appropriately be dealt with by up court. The Inco complete code and in to the assessment and re with which alone w case. The fact that after the amount of by an assessee has been determined or quantified its realization from governed by the Act because the income tax pay also being a d Doshion Veo rank pari pa company does not mean that the assessment proceedings held to be such other legal proce be started liquidation court under Sectio liquidation court, in our opinion, c functions of Income Tax Officers whi amount of tax payable by the asse assessees be the by the Court. The orders made by the Income Tax Officer in the proceedings are subject to appeal to the higher hierarchy under the provisions for reference to the High Court and appeals from Supreme Court and then there are provisions for revision by the Commissioner of In would lead to winding up court were to be held empowered to transfer the assess the company as income tax. The argument on behalf of the appe winding up cou decline to transfer the given case but the Section 446 court to be exercised only if considered expedient. We are not impressed MA No. Mr. Abhay N. Manudhane Resolution Professional of M/s Housing Development & proceedings in both the sub-sections must be such as can appropriately be dealt with by the winding up court. The Income Tax Act is, in our opinion, a complete code and in is particularly so with respect to the assessment and re- assessment of income tax with which alone we are concerned in the present case. The fact that after the amount of tax payable by an assessee has been determined or quantified realization from a company in liquidation is governed by the Act because the income tax pay also being a debt has to ITA no 78/MUM/2018 Doshion Veolia Water Solution P. Ltd. i passu with other debts due from the company does not mean that the assessment ceedings for computing the amount of tax must be held to be such other legal proceedings as can only be started or continued with the leave of the liquidation court under Section 446 of the Act. The liquidation court, in our opinion, cannot perform the unctions of Income Tax Officers while assessing the amount of tax payable by the assessees even if the ssees be the company which is being wound up by the Court. The orders made by the Income Tax Officer in the course of assessment or reassessment proceedings are subject to appeal to the higher hierarchy under the Income Tax Act. There are also for reference to the High Court and appeals from the decisions of the High Court to the Supreme Court and then there are provisions for revision by the Commissioner of Income Tax. would lead to anomalous consequences if the up court were to be held empowered to transfer the assessment proceedings to itself assess the company as income tax. The argument on behalf of the appellant by Shri Desai is that the winding up court is empowered in its discretion decline to transfer the assessment proceedings in a given case but the power on the plain language of 446 of the Act must be held to vest in that court to be exercised only if considered expedient. We are not impressed by this argument. MA No. 125 & 126/MUM/2023 5 Mr. Abhay N. Manudhane Resolution Professional of M/s Housing Development & Infrastructure Ltd sections must be such the winding e Tax Act is, in our opinion, a s particularly so with respect assessment of income tax are concerned in the present tax payable by an assessee has been determined or quantified a company in liquidation is governed by the Act because the income tax payable o ITA no 78/MUM/2018 ther debts due from the company does not mean that the assessment amount of tax must be dings as can only with the leave of the n 446 of the Act. The perform the essing the even if the wound up by the Court. The orders made by the Income Tax or reassessment proceedings are subject to appeal to the higher Act. There are also for reference to the High Court and for the decisions of the High Court to the Supreme Court and then there are provisions for come Tax. It if the up court were to be held empowered to and assess the company as income tax. The argument on is that the cretion to ssessment proceedings in a power on the plain language of of the Act must be held to vest in that court to be exercised only if considered expedient. by this argument. The Printed from counselvise.com language of Section 446 must be so construed as eliminate such s the winding up court with the powers of an Income Tax Officer conferred en him by the income Tax Act, because in our view the legislature could not have intended such a result 8. The argument that the proceedings for assessment being wound up can o with the leave of the liquidation court is also, on the scheme both of the Act and of the Income Tax Act, unacceptable. We have not been shown any principle on which the l vested with the power to stop assessment proceedings for det payable by the company which is The liquidation court would have full power t scrutinise the claim of the revenue after incom has been determined and its payment demanded from the liquidator. It would be open to the liquidation court thee is decide how far under the law the amount of income ta Department should be ac on the fun 78/MUM/2018 Do Ltd. liquidation. At that stage the winding up court can fully safeguard the interests of the company and its creditors under the Act. Incidentally, it may be pointed out that at the brought to our notice under which the assessment proceedings were held to be control winding up court. On the view that we have taken, the decisions in the case of Seth Spinning Mills L (In Liquidation) (1962) 46 the Mysore Spun Silk Mills Lt (1968) 68 ITR 295 (Mys) (supra) do not seem to lay down the correct rule of law that the Officers must obtain leave of the winding up court MA No. Mr. Abhay N. Manudhane Resolution Professional of M/s Housing Development & language of Section 446 must be so construed as iminate such startling consequences as investing the winding up court with the powers of an Income Officer conferred en him by the income Tax Act, because in our view the legislature could not have intended such a result. 8. The argument that the proceedings for assessment or re-assessment of a company which is being wound up can only be started of continued with the leave of the liquidation court is also, on the scheme both of the Act and of the Income Tax Act, unacceptable. We have not been shown any principle on which the liquidation court should be vested with the power to stop assessment proceedings for determining the amount of tax y the company which is being wound up. The liquidation court would have full power t scrutinise the claim of the revenue after income tax has been determined and its payment demanded from the liquidator. It would be open to the liquidation court thee is decide how far under the law the amount of income tax determined by the Department should be accepted as a lawful liability on the funds of the company in ITA no. 78/MUM/2018 Doshion Veolia Water Solution P. liquidation. At that stage the winding up court can fully safeguard the interests of the company and its creditors under the Act. Incidentally, it may be pointed out that at the Bar no English decision was brought to our notice under which the assessment proceedings were held to be controlled by the winding up court. On the view that we have taken, the decisions in the case of Seth Spinning Mills L Liquidation) (1962) 46 ITR 193 (Punj) (Supra) a the Mysore Spun Silk Mills Ltd., (In Liquidation) (1968) 68 ITR 295 (Mys) (supra) do not seem to lay down the correct rule of law that the Income Tax Officers must obtain leave of the winding up court MA No. 125 & 126/MUM/2023 6 Mr. Abhay N. Manudhane Resolution Professional of M/s Housing Development & Infrastructure Ltd language of Section 446 must be so construed as to onsequences as investing the winding up court with the powers of an Income Officer conferred en him by the income Tax Act, because in our view the legislature could not have 8. The argument that the proceedings for company which is nly be started of continued with the leave of the liquidation court is also, on the scheme both of the Act and of the Income Tax Act, unacceptable. We have not been shown any iquidation court should be vested with the power to stop assessment ermining the amount of tax ing wound up. The liquidation court would have full power to e tax has been determined and its payment demanded from the liquidator. It would be open to the liquidation court thee is decide how far under the ed by the cepted as a lawful liability ompany in ITA no. shion Veolia Water Solution P. liquidation. At that stage the winding up court can fully safeguard the interests of the company and its creditors under the Act. Incidentally, it may be Bar no English decision was brought to our notice under which the assessment ed by the winding up court. On the view that we have taken, the decisions in the case of Seth Spinning Mills Ltd., nj) (Supra) and (In Liquidation) (1968) 68 ITR 295 (Mys) (supra) do not seem to lay come Tax Officers must obtain leave of the winding up court Printed from counselvise.com for commencing of continuing assessment proceedings.\" 44. Therefore, this Court held that the authorities can only take steps to determine the tax, interest, fines or any penalty which is due. However, the authority cannot enforce a claim for recovery or levy of inte on the tax due during the period of moratorium. We are of the opinion that the above ratio squarely applies to the interplay between the IBC and the Customs Act in this co 45. From the above discussion, we hold that the respondent could only ini assessment of the duties and o cannot transgress such boundary and proceed to initiate recovery in violation of Sections 14 or 33(5) of the IBC. The interim Resolution Professional o may be, has an obligation to e is legal and he has been provided with sufficient power to question any assessment, if he finds the same to be excessive 54. On the basis of the above discussions following are our conclusions: i) Once moratorium is imposed in terms of Sections 14 or 33(5) of the IBC as the case may be, the respondent authority only has a limited jurisdiction to assess/determine the quantum of customs duty and other levies. The respondent authority do power to initiate recovery of dues by means of sale/confiscation, as provided under the Customs Act ii) After such assessment, the respo authority has to submit its customs dues operational debt) in terms of the procedure laid down, in strict compliance of the time periods ITA no. 78/MUM 2018 Doshion MA No. Mr. Abhay N. Manudhane Resolution Professional of M/s Housing Development & for commencing of continuing assessment or r ment proceedings.\" 44. Therefore, this Court held that the authorities can only take steps to determine the tax, interest, fines or any penalty which is due. However, the authority cannot enforce a claim for recovery or levy of interest on the tax due during the period of moratorium. We are of the opinion that the above ratio squarely applies to the interplay between the IBC and the Customs Act in this context. 45. From the above discussion, we hold that the respondent could only initiate assessment or re- assessment of the duties and other levies. They cannot transgress such boundary and proceed to initiate recovery in violation of Sections 14 or 33(5) of the IBC. The interim Resolution Professional, Resolution Professional or the liquidator, as the case may be, has an obligation to ensure that assessment is legal and he has been provided with sufficient power to question any assessment, if he finds the same to be excessive. On the basis of the above discussions following onclusions: Once moratorium is imposed in terms of Sections 14 or 33(5) of the IBC as the case may be, the respondent authority only has a limited jurisdiction to assess/determine the quantum of customs duty and other levies. The respondent authority does not have the power to initiate recovery of dues by means of sale/confiscation, as provided under the er such assessment, the respondent authority has to submit its claims (concerning customs dues operational debt) in terms of the edure laid down, in strict compliance of the time periods ITA no. 78/MUM 2018 Doshion MA No. 125 & 126/MUM/2023 7 Mr. Abhay N. Manudhane Resolution Professional of M/s Housing Development & Infrastructure Ltd assessment or re- Printed from counselvise.com Veolia Water Solution P. L the IBC, before the adjudicating authority. iii) In any case, the IRP/RP/liquidator can immediately secure goods from the r authority to be dealt with appropriately, in terms of the IBC.” 14. Hon’ble Apex Court in Civil appeal no. 6432 principal commissioner of custom V. Rajendra Prasad Tak and others, vide order dated 30.10.2023, has explicitly held the dues of the central board of indirect taxes and custom department of revenue, are to be paid in accordance with the waterfall mechanism as provided u and bankruptcy code 2016. This dictum is equally applicable in respect of the dues of the central board of direct taxes, department of revenue. 15. In view of aforesaid discussion and law laid down by Apex Court in Sundaresh Bhatt (Supra), we hold that the provisions of IBC 2016 would prevail over the Income Tax Act. However, Income Tax authorities have limited jurisdiction to assess/determine the quantum of Income Tax dues but have no authority to initiate recovery of such does at its own during the period of moratorium in violation of Section 14 or 33(5) of the IBC as the cas may be. The Income Tax Authorities are like any other creditor, may stake their claim before liquidator in the statutory limitation period provided under the IBC. Such claims can be considered in accordance with the waterfall mechanism provided u litigation, an appeal is treated as the continuation of a suit, the outcome of these appeals would also result in the determination of revenue's tax dues only. There is thus no legal impediment ITA no. 78/MJM/2018 Doshion Veo Solution P. Ltd. in deciding these appeal amount to determination of tax dues only. In the light of what has been held by us the instant matter on merit. MA No. Mr. Abhay N. Manudhane Resolution Professional of M/s Housing Development & Veolia Water Solution P. Ltd. prescribed under the IBC, before the adjudicating authority. In any case, the IRP/RP/liquidator can immediately secure goods from the respondent authority to be dealt with appropriately, in terms ble Apex Court in Civil appeal no. 6432-6433 of 2023, principal commissioner of custom V. Rajendra Prasad Tak and others, vide order dated 30.10.2023, has explicitly held the dues of the central board of indirect taxes and custom department of revenue, are to be paid in accordance with the waterfall mechanism as provided u/s. 53 of the insolvency and bankruptcy code 2016. This dictum is equally applicable the dues of the central board of direct taxes, department of revenue. 15. In view of aforesaid discussion and law laid down by Apex Court in Sundaresh Bhatt (Supra), we hold that the provisions of IBC 2016 would prevail over the Income Tax Act. Income Tax authorities have limited jurisdiction to assess/determine the quantum of Income Tax dues but have no authority to initiate recovery of such does at its own during the period of moratorium in violation of Section 14 or 33(5) of the IBC as the cas . The Income Tax Authorities are like any other creditor, may stake their claim before liquidator in the statutory limitation period provided under the IBC. Such claims can be considered in accordance with the waterfall mechanism provided u/s. 53 of IBC. As in the case of civil gation, an appeal is treated as the continuation of a suit, the outcome of these appeals would also result in the determination of revenue's tax dues only. There is thus no nt ITA no. 78/MJM/2018 Doshion Veolia Water in deciding these appeals, which would amount to determination of tax dues only. In the light of what has been held by us hereinabove. We now proceed to decide the instant matter on merit. MA No. 125 & 126/MUM/2023 8 Mr. Abhay N. Manudhane Resolution Professional of M/s Housing Development & Infrastructure Ltd 6433 of 2023, principal commissioner of custom V. Rajendra Prasad Tak and others, vide order dated 30.10.2023, has explicitly held that the dues of the central board of indirect taxes and custom department of revenue, are to be paid in accordance with the s. 53 of the insolvency and bankruptcy code 2016. This dictum is equally applicable the dues of the central board of direct taxes, 15. In view of aforesaid discussion and law laid down by Apex Court in Sundaresh Bhatt (Supra), we hold that the provisions of IBC 2016 would prevail over the Income Tax Act. Income Tax authorities have limited jurisdiction to assess/determine the quantum of Income Tax dues but have no authority to initiate recovery of such does at its own during the period of moratorium in violation of Section 14 or 33(5) of the IBC as the case . The Income Tax Authorities are like any other creditor, may stake their claim before liquidator in the statutory limitation period provided under the IBC. Such claims can be considered in accordance with the waterfall f IBC. As in the case of civil gation, an appeal is treated as the continuation of a suit, the outcome of these appeals would also result in the determination of revenue's tax dues only. There is thus no lia Water , which would amount to determination of tax dues only. In the light of what hereinabove. We now proceed to decide Printed from counselvise.com 4.2 We are in respectful agreement with position. Since the Revenue has now filed revised Form No. 36 bringing the CRP on record, there is no impediment in law recalling the relevant appeals and restoring them to their original numbers for adjudication on merits. Accordin recalled and restored to their original numbers. The Registry is directed to list the same for hearing in accordance with the ITAT Rules, 1963. 5. In the result, the Miscellaneous Application are allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on Sd/ (SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated: 22/09/2025 Rahul Sharma, Sr. P.S. Copy of the Order forwarded to 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file. //True Copy// MA No. Mr. Abhay N. Manudhane Resolution Professional of M/s Housing Development & We are in respectful agreement with the aforesaid legal position. Since the Revenue has now filed revised Form No. 36 bringing the CRP on record, there is no impediment in law recalling the relevant appeals and restoring them to their original numbers for adjudication on merits. Accordingly, the appeals are recalled and restored to their original numbers. The Registry is directed to list the same for hearing in accordance with the ITAT In the result, the Miscellaneous Applications ced in the open Court on 22/09/2025. Sd/- Sd/ SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL) (OM PRAKASH KANT JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Copy of the Order forwarded to : BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai MA No. 125 & 126/MUM/2023 9 Mr. Abhay N. Manudhane Resolution Professional of M/s Housing Development & Infrastructure Ltd the aforesaid legal position. Since the Revenue has now filed revised Form No. 36 bringing the CRP on record, there is no impediment in law for recalling the relevant appeals and restoring them to their original gly, the appeals are recalled and restored to their original numbers. The Registry is directed to list the same for hearing in accordance with the ITAT of the Revenue /09/2025. Sd/- OM PRAKASH KANT) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai Printed from counselvise.com "